Skip to content

Commit 601148a

Browse files
committed
adds lung health check first post
1 parent fcbba97 commit 601148a

5 files changed

Lines changed: 233 additions & 1 deletion

File tree

app/_layouts/product.njk

Lines changed: 2 additions & 1 deletion
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -48,7 +48,8 @@
4848
] },
4949
{ title: "Personalised prevention", services: [
5050
"Personalised prevention platform",
51-
"Smoking cessation"
51+
"Smoking cessation",
52+
"Lung health check"
5253
] }
5354
] %}
5455

app/posts/lung-health-check.md

Lines changed: 10 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
1+
---
2+
layout: collection
3+
title: Lung health check
4+
description: Helping more of the right people access lung health checks.
5+
pagination:
6+
data: collections.lung-health-check
7+
reverse: true
8+
size: 50
9+
permalink: "lung-health-check/{% if pagination.pageNumber > 0 %}page/{{ pagination.pageNumber + 1 }}{% endif %}/"
10+
---
Lines changed: 212 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,212 @@
1+
---
2+
title: "Health assessments discovery"
3+
description:
4+
"Summary of a discovery exploring which health checks the NHS could offer as digital self-assessments, and how to evaluate their potential."
5+
date: 2025-06-09
6+
---
7+
8+
This discovery sought to understand whether the NHS could introduce additional health checks as a digital self‑assessment.
9+
10+
Evidence strongly confirms that offering health checks to patients contributed to reducing health risks.
11+
12+
However, there is not sufficient understanding of what types of checks would provide the most benefit to patients if offered as a digital self‑assessment. It is also unclear if providing healthcare professionals (HCPs) with a choice between digital and in‑person assessments would add value.
13+
14+
We also did not know which groups would benefit most from access to self‑assessments, or how to ensure disadvantaged groups were included appropriately.
15+
16+
## Our goals
17+
18+
We structured our work around 3 goals:
19+
20+
### 1. Understand value and impact
21+
22+
We explored whether increased access to digital assessments could improve outcomes and reduce costs without adding strain on primary care.
23+
24+
### 2. Identify suitable use cases
25+
26+
We evaluated five health assessments in depth using a 3‑stage framework, identifying where measurable benefits were most likely.
27+
28+
### 3. Explore reusability and shared components
29+
30+
We assessed the feasibility of building reusable, scalable digital assessment tools using existing NHS infrastructure and design patterns.
31+
32+
## What we did
33+
34+
To support our discovery goals, we conducted a range of research activities. These helped us identify opportunities, highlight gaps, and inform the development of our evaluation framework for assessing the suitability of different health checks for digital self‑assessment. Our research activities included:
35+
36+
### Stakeholder engagement
37+
38+
Interviews with experts in commissioning, policy, strategy, technical, governance, compliance, and clinical fields.
39+
40+
### Spoke to experts
41+
42+
Regular consultations with internal technical and clinical subject matter experts (SMEs), explored clinical feasibility, safety, and what is likely to resonate with healthcare professionals, as well as considering technical possibilities and constraints. We also gathered insights from providers of health assessments, digital tools, and biometric tests.
43+
44+
### Desk research
45+
46+
Reviewing the NHS Health Check Online discovery and alpha reports, analysed NICE guidelines, NHS and DHSC policy documents (for example, Core20Plus5, NHS Long Term Plan, Digital Prevention Strategy), and studied public health literature, independent pilot studies, and past user research.
47+
48+
We used our research to design and refine a 3‑stage evaluation framework to assess the potential of digital self-assessments. This framework helps us evaluate:
49+
50+
#### Desirability
51+
52+
Does it provide value to users or meet system needs?
53+
54+
#### Potential impact on health inequalities
55+
56+
Could it improve access and outcomes for underserved groups?
57+
58+
#### Suitability
59+
60+
Is it appropriate for digital delivery and aligned with prevention priorities?
61+
62+
#### Feasibility
63+
64+
Can it be delivered effectively within current NHS systems and infrastructure?
65+
66+
## What we designed
67+
68+
Our main output from this work was the design and iteration of a 3‑stage evaluation framework to assess which health assessments are suitable for the Digital Prevention Services team to take forward.
69+
70+
Using this framework, we evaluated a longlist of opportunities and recommended five health assessments to proceed into design and development.
71+
72+
### Stage 1: Matrix analysis
73+
74+
We developed a Matrix to measure and better understand the details of assessments in relation to ten key categories. This process established whether the assessment in question is something we could take forward for further consideration. The evaluation criteria are consistent for each category and an overall conclusion is drawn for each as high, medium, low or positive and negative.
75+
76+
#### Ease of use
77+
78+
1. Ease of use for non‑experts
79+
2. Special equipment required
80+
3. Commonly measured
81+
4. Time taken for test
82+
83+
Scored – high, medium or low
84+
85+
#### Reuse potential
86+
87+
1. Data contributes to other assessments
88+
2. Test result stability (no Long‑term health conditions (LTCs))
89+
3. Test result stability (with LTCs)
90+
91+
Scored – high, medium or low
92+
93+
#### Digital Feasibility
94+
95+
1. Feasibility of offering digital testing
96+
2. Risks of a digital offer
97+
98+
Scored – high, medium or low
99+
100+
#### Strategic alignment
101+
102+
Alignment with either NHS, DHSC or wider government priorities
103+
104+
Scored – high, medium or low
105+
106+
#### Value for money
107+
108+
Potential scope for NHS value for money if digitised
109+
110+
Scored – high, medium or low
111+
112+
#### Complexity
113+
114+
1. Assessment method
115+
2. Amount of data needed
116+
3. Interpretation of results
117+
4. Digital clinical safety risk
118+
119+
Scored – high, medium or low
120+
121+
##### Population impact
122+
123+
1. Assessment is universal for all adults
124+
2. Cohort aimed at
125+
3. Prevalence of condition being assessed
126+
127+
Scored – high, medium or low
128+
129+
#### Health inequalities
130+
131+
Summarised impact on health inequalities
132+
133+
Scored – positive or negative
134+
135+
#### Cost
136+
137+
1. Current or potential cost of processing the assessment
138+
2. Cost is accounted for by primary or secondary care
139+
3. Current cost to public user
140+
141+
Scored – high, medium or low
142+
143+
#### Benefit to user
144+
145+
1. Reversibility of condition
146+
2. Provides new information about their health
147+
3. Behaviour change potential
148+
4. Assessment outcome
149+
150+
Scored – high, medium or low
151+
152+
### Stage 2: Suitability analysis
153+
154+
Stage 2 examined if each health assessment:
155+
156+
1. positively impacts health inequalities?
157+
2. is suitable for prevention?
158+
3. is suitable and safe for a digital version?
159+
160+
For each of these questions, the health assessment needs to meet at least one of a selection of criteria to qualify for the next stage. More details of these criteria can be found on the [Mural board](https://app.mural.co/t/nhsdigital8118/m/nhsdigital8118/1741255574984/dd08373f33f49bdf1915efeab171af94b4ec2071?sender=u8ca06001054231a776328187).
161+
162+
163+
### Stage 3: Feasibility analysis
164+
165+
Stage 3 examined how feasible it would be to offer a digital version of an assessment. All health assessments follow a similar high‑level process – Data submission, Data storage and evaluation, and onward action.
166+
167+
In this stage we map the data points that would be required to fulfil the end‑to-end assessment. These data points are then categorised into the following:
168+
169+
// to do add diagram
170+
171+
- Red – Not currently possible to capture, measure or evaluate
172+
- Green – Currently possible to capture, measure or evaluate
173+
174+
If a data point is evaluated as red, it does not mean it will not be considered for further exploration – it allows us to see what is currently available, and what will need to be built to deliver an assessment.
175+
176+
#### The assessments we tested
177+
178+
After deciding on the best evaluation method for testing face to face heath assessments as a potential digital offering, we tested various health assessments against the Evaluation Framework.
179+
180+
Below are the conditions we tested through our evaluation framework and were determined not suitable recommendations for alpha. In addition to these, we concluded that several other options were out of scope and so were ruled out before being assessed using the framework.
181+
182+
- Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) pre‑diagnosis
183+
- Severe mental illness (SMI) health checks
184+
- Assessment onto the smoking cessation whilst pregnant programme
185+
- Annual ‘follow up’ checks for adults who have undertaken bariatric surgery
186+
- Annual health checks for people with a learning disability
187+
- Dementia screening test
188+
189+
We engaged with SMEs throughout the discovery, helping us to make an informed evaluation of each potential assessment and ultimately identify suitable use cases to take forward.
190+
191+
### What’s next
192+
193+
We concluded, there are several use cases identified as strong potential as a digital self‑assessment. We recommended 5 high‑potential assessments with potential to advance to a design and development phase. These were:
194+
195+
- NICE recommended annual BMI and waist checks for people with long term conditions
196+
- Digital weight management programme pre‑assessment
197+
- Vital 5
198+
- Lung health screening pre‑assessment
199+
- Annual asthma review
200+
201+
To help us prioritise the chronology of what comes next, we compared all these assessments in terms of their benefits, impact and alignment with current policy. This gave SLT as much information as possible, in a consistent way to evaluate the best course of action.
202+
203+
Once the priority health assessments are chosen, next steps include:
204+
205+
- understanding the users and cohorts for each use case
206+
- prototyping and testing user journeys
207+
- refining clinical and technical standards
208+
- developing pilots
209+
- continuing research with end users and healthcare professionals
210+
211+
Our [evaluation framework](https://app.mural.co/t/nhsdigital8118/m/nhsdigital8118/1748336228396/c6cd1e4416fe47ef96015eb2ee86a79a8db5a1a0) can be reused to guide future work in this space, supporting decisions about desirability, feasibility, and strategic fit for digital health services.
212+
Lines changed: 5 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
1+
{
2+
"eleventyNavigation": {
3+
"parent": "Lung health check"
4+
}
5+
}

eleventy.config.js

Lines changed: 4 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -117,6 +117,10 @@ module.exports = function (eleventyConfig) {
117117
return collection.getFilteredByGlob('app/posts/smoking-cessation/**/*.md')
118118
})
119119

120+
eleventyConfig.addCollection('lung-health-check', collection => {
121+
return collection.getFilteredByGlob('app/posts/lung-health-check/**/*.md')
122+
})
123+
120124
eleventyConfig.addCollection('guide', collection => {
121125
return collection.getFilteredByGlob('app/guide/**/*.md')
122126
})

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)